Disqualification Case Vs Duterte: Overlooked by the Press

 

THE CERTIFICATE of Candidacy (COC) that anyone aspiring for public office in the Philippines has to fill out accurately is sacrosanct in a democracy. That is why all candidates have to swear an oath attesting to the veracity of the COC before an officer of the law.  The COC’s importance cannot be overstated, which is why when a presidential aspirant’s eligibility for candidacy depends on it, the press should take it seriously and explore all angles to discuss the issue for the sake of the public and for the sake of our democracy.

The media’s failure to cover adequately the disqualification case against Davao City mayor and presidential candidate Rodrigo Duterte reflects sheer press laziness and incompetence or a lack of appreciation of the COC’s value. At the very least, competent coverage could have led to new but relevant perspectives that would help clarify the issue to the public.

Reasonable but Overlooked?

Duterte did not file a COC, having repeatedly declared in public statements that he was not interested in running for national office. After much dillydallying, every expression of which was reported dutifully by the media, Duterte finalized his run for president—a decision also faithfully reported by the media. He replaced former Quezon City barangay chairman Martin Diño who first filed his COC as the standard-bearer of the Partido Demokratiko Pilipino-Lakas ng Bayan (PDP-Laban).

But Duterte’s substitution for Diño was met with four disqualification petitions, all questioning the validity of his candidacy because of a glaring error in Diño’s COC for president. The petitions argued that Duterte has no bona fide candidate to substitute for because Diño’s COC for president was “materially defective and is, therefore, invalid.”

A Rappler article published October 2015 showed copies of Diño’s and Vice President Jejomar Binay’s COC for president for comparison. Despite filling up the COC form for president, it was clear that Diño wrote “mayor” (of Pasay City) as the position he was seeking. Binay’s COC clearly stated that he is running for president.

It can be argued that the error, in itself, could be a sound basis for disqualification, especially since Diño affixed his signature right below the declaration in the COC that says “I hereby certify that the facts stated herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge.” Below this oath is the subscription of this oath by Diño’s lawyer.

“No Material Misrepresentation”

But the Commission on Elections’ (Comelec) First Division, on February 3, junked all four petitions filed by broadcaster Ruben Castor, UP Diliman Student Council chairperson John Paulo Delas Nieves, and presidential aspirants lawyer Ely Pamatong and Rizalito David, citing lack of merit. The division said it found “no material misrepresentation” in Duterte’s COC for president and that, therefore, “it is valid and it gives rise to a valid candidacy.”

Given the position at stake, one would expect the Comelec to impose the strictest rules down to the smallest of details, such as correctly filling up the information required by the COC. The technicality would have cost the validity of Duterte’s substitution for Diño and, in turn, his presidential bid, but the press chose to ignore the matter.

The media should have looked deeper into this instead of merely citing the resolution and merely quoting Commissioner Christian Robert Lim, Comelec First Division head, during a February 3 press briefing. For one, reports on the junking of the petitions did not explain how the division arrived at the decision.

CMFR tried to obtain the 50-page resolution on Duterte’s disqualification case from the Comelec website, but the document was not available as of press time. We then directly inquired about the document from the Comelec and learned from the Office of the Clerk of the Commission that in order to access the document, one must first file a letter of request that states the purpose for which the document will be used. The letter of request is subject to the approval of the Comelec commissioners, the office said. To be fair, this could be the reason why the press hardly had any coverage of this decision, but this issue is imbued with public interest so a more enterprising approach was needed.

Philippine Daily Inquirer columnist Raul Palabrica did discuss this in his February 15 column. He criticized the First Division’s attitude toward the mistake by treating it “as if it were a mere typographical error or slip of the pen that did not deserve closer evaluation.” He pointed out that Dino and his party mates had already announced earlier that they were going to use the COC for Duterte’s substitution, “thus, early on, it was obvious that Diño was anything but serious in filing his COC for president. He treated his COC as an instrument or toy to play with to satisfy his caprice. He was no different from other COC filers who wanted to enjoy three minutes of national fame.”

Insufficient Discussion, Lack of Aggressiveness

In tackling the disqualification cases faced by Duterte, it is important to understand the merits of the petitions’ argument. It would have helped if the media discussed the process through which the COCs of candidates undergo verification as it would explain and identify what went wrong down the line. The press could have referred to Rule II of Resolution 9984, the Comelec’s rules and regulations governing the filing of certificates of candidacy, in discussing this process.

The press should also have been more cognizant of the importance of the issue, and have asked hard questions instead of just reporting what was said by persons of authority or official documents. In this case, the media failed to question how the Comelec arrived at its decision despite what seemed like a reasonable argument. One must now wonder whether the filing of COCs is still relevant if errors and technicalities with profound effects can be easily disregarded. In the words of Palabrica, “the election commissioners concerned trivialized the value of the application for election to the highest position of the land.”